Well, I said earlier I'd wait to hear what Cliven Bundy had to say about what the New York Times quoted him as saying, and credit where credit is due. He didn't lie, equivocate or issue the sort of faux apology we've come to expect from public figures in his situation. Here's his reply (h/t, The Right Scoop) in full:
“That’s exactly what I said. I said I’m wondering if they’re better off under government subsidy, and their young women are having the abortions and their young men are in jail, and their older women and their children are standing, sitting out on the cement porch without nothing to do, you know, I’m wondering: Are they happier now under this government subsidy system than they were when they were slaves, and they was able to have their family structure together, and the chickens and garden, and the people had something to do? And so, in my mind I’m wondering, are they better off being slaves, in that sense, or better off being slaves to the United States government, in the sense of the subsidies. I’m wondering. That’s what. And the statement was right. I am wondering.”
Now, if President Obama said the sun rose in the west and it didn't poll well, rest assured he and his media sycophants would telling you really said 'sets' instead of rises rather than just admit he said what he said, and that's that. Cliven Bundy is simply a different kind of man, and as badly wrong as he is here, at least he sticks by it. If the two of us were having a conversation and I asked him how he felt about something, I think the chances are good he'd tell me the truth.With President Obama a conversation based on the reasonable premise of truth would be impossible.
While a lot of people who were championing him before are quite properly distancing themselves from his ridiculous remarks, they aren't realizing that they're also distancing themselves from the real issues - that contrary to what you're hearing, he may in fact have had a legal case of sorts (look up 'prescriptive easement' and 'adverse possession', especially as they apply to Nevada law for details), that the Bureau of Land Management tried to seize land under false pretenses, that they illegally seized private property without compensation by stealing Bundy's cattle and shooting them and sent a heavily armed SWAT team to besiege Bundy's home and act like Nazi stormtroopers in general.
Even the 'tax issue' is moot.The normal way the feds act in these situations is to go to court, make their case and if they prevail, slap a tax lien on the property, as well as other legal remedies like vehicle and bank levies. Most of the time, that step isn;t even necessary because the feds and the taxpayer agree to a settlement.The feds didn't tak ethis to court because they were in a hurry to gift the land to Harry Reid's cronies for that bogus solar facility, and because they wanted to make an example of Bundy for fighting back.
Those are the real issues, and whether Cliven Bundy is a 'ra-aaa-acist' as the Left paints him or not, guess what? He has legal rights,constitutional rights and property right too.And I don't have to agree remotely with what he said about blacks and slavery to understand that.
If racism is the criteria of whether people have rights or not, then Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan and a slew of others I could name belong in the same boat.
UPDATE: Here's the original video,